Recommended Posts

Is anyone using the new mozilla profile manager? http://ftp.mozilla.o...ilemanager/1.0/

profilemanager.jpg

Now is very easy to use use all firefox versions without having to change things on shortcuts icons. Besides by changing the user agent string on about:config (nightly and ux are recognized as mobile browsers for some websites) (string->new->general.useragent.override->value=(example: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/8.0) you can try every version without worry.

I wonder if mozilla will add the option to add a new tab as private without having to star a new session. (like google chrome)

Memory consumption is moot when most people now have computers with at least 4GB ram these days. This is like saying I have a 250GB hd and Windows system files take up 15GB. Low ram footprint is always great, but I'm not worried about it when it means giving up performance.

Freeing up memory and allocating memory are not free operations.

Anyone know how to get the extension Linkification to work with Firefox 9.0 Beta? Almost all of my extensions work except for that one and the Java console. It worked great in 8.0

You can install Addon Compatibility reporter. That should allow it to work.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/add-on-compatibility-reporter/?src=api

Yes I know, 11 is a great deal faster and does better things but the same results could have been with Firefox 4.11. The only reason they jumped the numbers up, was due to Chrome. This cannot be denied. At the rate Mozilla is going we will have a Firefox 20 by 2013.

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

  • Like 3

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

:yes:

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

I am glad to hear that, then I hope that you are testing every release up and including the final.

Some sweetness related to addons - more will come soon - in the end (default compatibility of addons)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700201

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695977

-Removal Trace Monkey JS engine code may happen this week, which means 67k lines code going to finish its journey in FF. Also related bugs to it will die. (in test process currently)

-Silent Updates (removal of UAC dialog) work is finished and may land soon. (in review process currently)

-Partial support of Chrome to FF your data import is done, may land soon (in review process currently)

I am glad to hear that, then I hope that you are testing every release up and including the final.

There is no need to follow each version through Nightly, Aurora, then Beta, and especially not after Final is released. If a bug or feature isn't fixed coming out of Nightly then that usually means you can just keep following it in the next version of Nightly. Aurora is basically for stability testing of the Nightly patches that landed and Beta is pretty much what the Release Candidates used to be.

You can install Addon Compatibility reporter. That should allow it to work.

https://addons.mozil...porter/?src=api

I knew about that, but I didn't think I'd have to do that since all my other addons work. I found a hacked version that works, though. Here is the link to it for anyone that wants it. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2061460/linkification_1.3.9c.xpi

There is no need to follow each version through Nightly, Aurora, then Beta, and especially not after Final is released. If a bug or feature isn't fixed coming out of Nightly then that usually means you can just keep following it in the next version of Nightly. Aurora is basically for stability testing of the Nightly patches that landed and Beta is pretty much what the Release Candidates used to be.

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

Grinder, can you do us all a favor and at least go and read up on some official resources before spewing your misinformation all over the place? I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, but if it's to be helpful and share accurate information, you are failing horribly at it.

Grinder, can you do us all a favor and at least go and read up on some official resources before spewing your misinformation all over the place? I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, but if it's to be helpful and share accurate information, you are failing horribly at it.

What I posted is correct. Nightly patches are for Nightly builds. Aurora patches are for Aurora builds. You sir are the one that fails to comprehend a very simple concept. I suggest that you visit some of the sites below and educate yourself:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Features/Release_Tracking

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Main_Page

https://quality.mozilla.org/

https://affiliates.mozilla.org/en-US/

http://www.andrewturnbull.net/mozilla/historyfx.html

https://developer.mozilla.org/en

You can do me a favor and just leave me alone as you are contributing nothing.

anyone?

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Features/Desktop/Firefox_Home_Tab

The above is all I can find on it.

What I posted is correct. Nightly patches are for Nightly builds. Aurora patches are for Aurora builds.

I see now that rather than educating yourself, you're choosing to throw a hissy fit over your ignorance getting called out. So would you mind telling us which one of your posted links back up your claim above, or that Aurora is stable? :rolleyes:

I see now that rather than educating yourself, you're choosing to throw a hissy fit over your ignorance getting called out. So would you mind telling us which one of your posted links back up your claim above, or that Aurora is stable? :rolleyes:

You still have a problem with the English language. I said that The Nightly build that I am using is stable. To this is can prove as it has never crashed. I did use Aurora while it was still under the release as a Nightly and at that time it was stable. I do not use Aurora now so I have no Idea of it's stability other than to say if the build was stable as a Nightly, logic would dictate that it is stable in the second release phase which is Aurora,

I need to switch from Nightly to Aurora today, since yesterday Nightly build I'm facing memory leaks, when You look in about:memory after few minutes of browsing there will be entry: "Heap Unclassified" which is not releasing memory and during browsing this memory is stuck there for good (browser restart), I've check this in save mode, normal mode with all adds disabled, same thing over and over again, on Mozilla forum I saw some similar reports but looks like no one is taking this seriously... :)

Edit:

OK, Looks like bug is on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=702813

I need to switch from Nightly to Aurora today, since yesterday Nightly build I'm facing memory leaks, when You look in about:memory after few minutes of browsing there will be entry: "Heap Unclassified" which is not releasing memory and during browsing this memory is stuck there for good (browser restart), I've check this in save mode, normal mode with all adds disabled, same thing over and over again, on Mozilla forum I saw some similar reports but looks like no one is taking this seriously... :)

Edit:

OK, Looks like bug is on https://bugzilla.moz...g.cgi?id=702813

I'm experiencing the same issue. Thanks for the link.

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

Yeah, the Nightly builds have been very stable for me for quite some time, too. That being said there's still a chance that you'll run into issues (like the one above) that an Aurora user would be less likely to encounter.

From some of your other posts you seemed to hint that you should test, for example, Nightly 11, then Aurora 11, and so on. I was just saying there's no need to do so. I wasn't saying that each channel doesn't get their own patches.

I had that same issue when I updated my nightly and finally got to restoring it. browsed the net for a while... had the same thing.

had 2.2GB commit and 2.1GB RAM usage overnight. I only left 15 tabs open overnight. but with 120 approx browser actions.

I'm experiencing the same issue. Thanks for the link.

Yeah, the Nightly builds have been very stable for me for quite some time, too. That being said there's still a chance that you'll run into issues (like the one above) that an Aurora user would be less likely to encounter.

From some of your other posts you seemed to hint that you should test, for example, Nightly 11, then Aurora 11, and so on. I was just saying there's no need to do so. I wasn't saying that each channel doesn't get their own patches.

What I said is that I do not do that, I stay with the Nightly Builds. I did say that the Builds that I did test turned into Aurora and they were stable when I tested them in the nightly channel. One may run into problems no matter what channel that they are on. It is supposed to be that the Final is more stable than the Beta and the Beta is more stable than Aurora and so forth. But it does not always work that way. Firefox 8.01 will be released later today or tomorrow , so I suppose a problem was found. More than likely a security issue.

You still have a problem with the English language. I said that The Nightly build that I am using is stable. To this is can prove as it has never crashed. I did use Aurora while it was still under the release as a Nightly and at that time it was stable. I do not use Aurora now so I have no Idea of it's stability other than to say if the build was stable as a Nightly, logic would dictate that it is stable in the second release phase which is Aurora,

Or maybe you should learn some technical knowledge about software and realize that stability entails a lot more than simply not crashing. And even then the current Aurora channel contained at least two crasher bugs when it was first released. Just because you don't run into them since you don't do extensive testing doesn't mean no one else does.

There's also no such thing as Aurora "having its own patching process". If you really knew how Bugzilla works you'd also know that all incoming patches are always merged with mozilla-central first, but tracking flags can be nominated for each bug to be merged to other release channels as well without waiting for the patched mozilla-central code to trickle out to them days or weeks later.

Again, if your intention is to help, then please make sure you have accurate information before you do. If your intention here is simply to put on a show of being more intelligent and informed than you actually are... then carry on, I guess.

Anyone know why Firefox always slows down and even locks up for a few seconds whenever downloads are done? I don't have that issue with Chrome or other browsers. Is it because of the pop-up notification, poor code, bad extension, or what? Is that being worked on? It's my only real complaint right now. Surely I'm not the only one experiencing this, right? I'm using 9.0 Beta

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • AMD RX 9070 GRE AI, Blender benchmarks vs 9070 XT, 7800XT, Nvidia RTX 5070, 4070 by Sayan Sen Earlier this week, we shared the first part of our review of AMD's new RX 9070 GRE. It was about the gaming performance of the GPU, and we gave it an 8 out of 10. As a follow-up, similar to how we did with the 9070 XT and non-XT, we are doing a dedicated productivity review for the RX 9070 GRE as well, where we compare it against the 9070 XT, 9070, 7800 XT, as well as Nvidia's 5070 and 4070. This will include AI, rendering, compute, and more benchmarks. AI performance, especially, is a very important metric in today's world, and AMD also promised big improvements thanks to its underlying architectural improvements. We will be pitching it against the data we already have for the RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT, but also the Nvidia 5070 FE, MSI GeForce RTX 4070 VENTUS 2X 12G, and Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT GAMING OC 16G as they are in a similar price class, but also because we do not have a comparable 5060 Ti card lying around here that we can compare it against. Before we get underway, this is a collaboration between Sayan Sen and Steven Parker, who lent me his test bed. Also, there was no editorial input from AMD. First up, the specs of the RX 9070, 9070 XT, and 9070 GRE, which were given to us by AMD: Radeon RX 9070 GRE Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Boost Clock: Game Clock: up to 2.79GHz up to 2.20GHz up to 2.52GHz up to 2.07GHz up to 2.97GHz up to 2.40GHz Stream Processors 3,072 (48 CU) 3,584 (56 CU) 4,096 (64 CU) Ray Accelerator 48 56 64 AI Accelerator 96 112 128 ROPs 96 128 Texture Mapping Units 192 224 256 Memory 12 GB GDDR6, 18Gbps Clock, 192-bit Bus 432 GB/s 16 GB GDDR6, 20Gbps Clock, 256-bit Bus Effective Memory Bandwidth: 640 GB/s Infinity Cache 48 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen) Card Bus PCI-E 5.0 X16 Output 2x HDMI 2.1b 2x DisplayPort 2.1a Power consumption 220W 304W Recommended PSU 650W 750W Slot width 2x 3x Price (SEP) $549 $599 As you can see from the specs above, it is less than the standard RX 9070 in every way that counts, except for slightly higher Boost and Game clock speed. Design Moving on, the RX 9070 GRE we were given is an XFX Swift triple-fan, dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors. At 30cm (self-measured), it will fit in most systems easily. There is no RGB either. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by XFX from all angles. Test system Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS Z890 ProArt Creator WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8246) AMD shared a press driver based on the recently released Adrenaline 26.5.2 that we were required to use. We now move on to our benchmarks. First up, we have Geekbench AI running on ONNX. For some reason, the 9070 GRE does exceptionally well here in both half-precision (FP16) and single-precision (FP32). It manages to beat the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 non-XT, and is only behind the 9070 XT. Since Geekbench runs in short bursts instead of continuously hammering the graphics card, it seems the GRE's faster boost clocks are helping here. Next up, we move to the UL Procyon AI test suite, starting with the image generation benchmark. We chose the Stable Diffusion XL FP16 test since it is the most intense workload available on Procyon. The Nvidia cards do very well here, as even the 4070 out-muscles AMD's best fairy easily. The positive thing about the GRE is that it gets quite close to the 9070 non-XT in this test; this indicates that the VRAM does not play a very big role here, as SD XL relies on float16 (FP16). So this is something to keep in mind again. If you wish to work with float32 AI workloads, graphics cards with larger than 12 GB buffers would likely emerge as victors. Regardless, the gains are still massive on AMD's 9000 series compared to the 7000 series. Following image generation, we move to the text generation benchmark. This is one test where the 9070 GRE struggled, quite a lot. It seems that the 12 GB VRAM and lower memory bandwidth of the new Radeon 9070 GRE are hurting it quite a bit; the split is massive, especially in a test like Llama2, which packs 13 billion parameters. As such, in all the tests, the 9070 GRE is the slowest of the lot. Next, we tried Blender, and here the AMD GPUs were beaten by Nvidia. Rendering is something the Green team has always had a lead over the Red side, and it has not changed so far. On the positive side, though, the 9070 GRE shows significantly better results than the 7800 XT, which means AMD is on the right path. Catching up to Nvidia, though, will require a lot more effort. And we hope HIP and ROCm can keep improving. Wrapping up AI testing, we measured OpenCL throughput in the Geekbench compute benchmark. The RX 9070 GRE alongside the 9070 did not fare well here at all, even falling behind the 7800 XT. Interestingly, even the RTX 5070 could not beat the 4070 on OpenCL, so perhaps this suggests that OpenCL optimization may not have been a priority for either AMD or Nvidia in the modern era. Conclusion We reached the end of our productivity performance review of the 9070 GRE, and we have to say it's a mixed bag. Unlike the 9070 and 9070 XT, the GRE excels in some areas while losing ground fairly easily in others. Similar to how it happened in gaming, any time the card's memory subsystem gets hammered, it tends to fall behind the others. This was the case with text generation, wherein we saw the VRAM sometimes hit its maximum available 12 GB of usage with larger model sizes. So what do we make of the RX 9070 as a productivity hardware? It can certainly be used, but you have to know it has its limitations. For those looking for a GPU that can deal with more, AMD recently unveiled the Radeon AI PRO R9700, which is essentially a 32 GB refresh of the 9070 XT with some additional workstation-based optimizations. On a similar note, the new Ryzen AI Halo platform is something you can consider if you want to set up a local AI processing station. Considering everything, we rate AMD's Radeon RX 9070 GRE a 7.5 out of 10 for its productivity performance. Price is less of a factor for those looking at productivity cases compared to those considering the GPU for gaming, and as such, we felt it did quite decently on many occasions and can be handy if you need a 12 GB GPU and, for some reason, don't want to get Nvidia. Purchase links: RX 9070 / XT / GRE (Amazon US) As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Does anyone here know if these updates are integrated into the UUP dump isos?
    • Motrix Next 3.9.4 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.4 changelog: Motrix Next 3.9.4 promotes the 3.9.4 beta cycle to stable. This release refreshes bundled engine binaries, improves task detail readability and copy actions, expands link handling for magnet and ED2K workflows, polishes responsive navigation and text wrapping, updates browser extension documentation, and refines network preference controls. New Features Task Detail copy actions — Added copyable values for task metadata and reusable render functions for long text fields. Magnet and ED2K lifecycle support — Added task lifecycle handling for magnet and ED2K links. History cleanup for deleted tasks — Deleted tasks can now remove matching history records. User-Agent management — Added user-agent management and improved related network preference controls. Browser extension documentation — Added the Firefox Add-ons link for the Motrix Next extension. Improvements Engine binaries — Updated bundled binaries for supported architectures. Task Detail readability — Long task names, URLs, tracker values, and copyable metadata now render more clearly. Deletion messaging — Refined localized task deletion text for clarity and consistency. Text wrapping — Improved URI input wrapping and task name multiline display. Navigation layout — Improved sub-navigation responsiveness. Disk allocation default — Changed the default file allocation method to trunc. Proxy controls — Improved proxy button styling in network preferences. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      244
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      66
    5. 5
      +Edouard
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!